None dare call it ...

Robert Reich asks a pointed question.

Suppose a small group of extremely wealthy people sought to systematically destroy the U.S. government by

1. finding and bankrolling new candidates pledged to shrinking and dismembering it
2. intimidating or bribing many current senators and representatives to block all proposed legislation, prevent the appointment of presidential nominees, eliminate funds to implement and enforce laws, and threaten to default on the nation’s debt
3. taking over state governments in order to redistrict, gerrymander, require voter IDs, purge voter rolls, and otherwise suppress the votes of the majority in federal elections
4. running a vast PR campaign designed to convince the American public of certain big lies, such as climate change isn't occurring, and
5. buying up the media so the public cannot know the truth.

Would you call this treason?

I would not. The Constitution is very specific about treason because it's too easy to make the accusation of “treason” into an all-purpose attack, as Reich does here.

But that's not really the question he's asking, is it?